Ireland legalized abortion: what do YOU think about this?

[The New California Republic]

"So let's just kill the fetus" isn't monstrous? When people are ill, we don't murder them to get it over with. Murder doesn't become legal if a person is terminally ill.

Isn’t it legal to euthanize someone if they give consent?

I really don't think he cares too much about that kind of thing either, given the hissy fit here:

I would switch off the life support machine of a human who was brain dead.

I really can't talk with you if you think it's fine to kill humans. As is usual for this thread, carry on with your murderous barbarism.

[Genivaria]

Isn’t it legal to euthanize someone if they give consent?

I really don't think he cares too much about that kind of thing either, given the hissy fit here:

I really can't talk with you if you think it's fine to kill humans. As is usual for this thread, carry on with your murderous barbarism.

Throwing out an insult and storming out is the sign of a truly enlightened debater.

[Petrolheadia]

I really don't think he cares too much about that kind of thing either, given the hissy fit here:

Throwing out an insult and storming out is the sign of a truly enlightened debater.

Yeah, it's an art that is only matched by saving power by removing cooling systems of devices.

[Petrolheadia]

Where do I do that?

What makes you feel disgust differs from individual to individual. I find the Catholic Church disgusting.

In this particular post, you treat disgust with ending the lives of humans as a difference of taste rather than as a valued moral principle.

These aren't human lives. They are consciousnessless biological existences.

From the scientific standpoint, an early-term abortion is basically on a similar level to tumor removal or weeding a garden out.

[Petrolheadia]

Shame that a fetus isn't classed as a child tho, so your statement really doesn't apply here.

And forcing the woman to carry the unwanted fetus to term is enslavement of the woman to the fetus for 9 months, giving the fetus a right over her that no person has.

It's troubling that you're willing to permanently end the life of an unborn child, even the potential to life with everything in it with no second chances because of semantics.

Why care about any possibility that the person affected would not be aware of?

[Hakons]

I really don't think he cares too much about that kind of thing either, given the hissy fit here:

Throwing out an insult and storming out is the sign of a truly enlightened debater.

Pro-life arguments are an extreme minority here, so whenever I post about this happens.

"So let's just kill the fetus" isn't monstrous? When people are ill, we don't murder them to get it over with. Murder doesn't become legal if a person is terminally ill.

Fetuses aren't people. Jeez man, how many times do we need to hammer this point home?

Voluntary euthanasia is a completely different kettle of fish. And we do allow people to die, as shown by the presence of the Dignitas clinic.

And the fetus in this case is going to die anyway:

Scans reportedly show that the foetus' organs are growing outside its body, an abnormality that the woman's doctor and two consultants agree will prove fatal

"So let's just kill the fetus" isn't monstrous? When people are ill, we don't murder them to get it over with. Murder doesn't become legal if a person is terminally ill.

Its a fatal abnormality, the foetus is done for anyway. All they are doing is making the woman suffer for longer. Its organs are growing outside of its body. Three medical professionals, the womans own doctor and two others have stated this.

"So let's just kill the fetus" isn't monstrous? When people are ill, we don't murder them to get it over with. Murder doesn't become legal if a person is terminally ill.

I love that your moral outrage is directed in favor of making two people suffer pointlessly for a month.

I mean, Jesus Christ. That kid's organs are on the outside. That's got to be agony. And it's not like he or she has any mitigating factor that might make life worth living. Their existence is an airless, dark, fleshy sack. There are punishments in The Inferno that aren't as bad as this.

"So let's just kill the fetus" isn't monstrous? When people are ill, we don't murder them to get it over with. Murder doesn't become legal if a person is terminally ill.

So you want to make 2 people suffer instead of one despite the fact that the fetus is doomed regardless? Jesus Christ bro.

"So let's just kill the fetus" isn't monstrous? When people are ill, we don't murder them to get it over with. Murder doesn't become legal if a person is terminally ill.

Firstly, fetuses aren't people.

Secondly, the fetus will die anyway. All you're doing by denying this woman an abortion is prolonging her suffering. That's monstrous.

"So let's just kill the fetus" isn't monstrous? When people are ill, we don't murder them to get it over with. Murder doesn't become legal if a person is terminally ill.

Isn’t it legal to euthanize someone if they give consent?

I can respond to them. This is evidently one of my more passionate issues, but at some point one has to realize arguing ad naseum on an obscure internet forum isn't a productive use of time.

Isn’t it legal to euthanize someone if they give consent?

I really don't think he cares too much about that kind of thing either, given the hissy fit here:

I really can't talk with you if you think it's fine to kill humans. As is usual for this thread, carry on with your murderous barbarism.

That's from a different thread, but thanks for being petty. I believe that was shortly before you whined to moderation. "Don't use mods as a weapon" has unfortunately become something of a joke.

[The Rich Port]

Oh jeez, Pope Francis is nuh gunna be happy 'bout dis. o-o

"THE WOMEN ARE DOING WHAT WITH THEIR BODIES?! UNNACEPPTABLEEEEEEEEE"

[The New California Republic]

I can respond to them. This is evidently one of my more passionate issues, but at some point one has to realize arguing ad naseum on an obscure internet forum isn't a productive use of time.

So your response to "why should the woman and fetus be made to suffer unnecessarily" is: "this is a waste of time". What a shameless cop out.

---

That's from a different thread, but thanks for being petty. I believe that was shortly before you whined to moderation.

It's from a different thread, but it shows a pattern of behavior that needed to be brought forward to show your attitude to such things.

[Hakons]

I can respond to them. This is evidently one of my more passionate issues, but at some point one has to realize arguing ad naseum on an obscure internet forum isn't a productive use of time.

So your response to "why should the woman and fetus be made to suffer unnecessarily" is: "this is a waste of time". What a shameless cop out.

---

That's from a different thread, but thanks for being petty. I believe that was shortly before you whined to moderation.

It's from a different thread, but it shows a pattern of behavior that needed to be brought forward to show your attitude to such things.

In brief, I'm not utilitarian. The ends do not justify the means. Abortion is a murderous action, which is worse then temporary suffering. It is certainly a difficult choice, but it is better to have the fetus die from natural causes than to kill him/her. When someone is ill, we don't rip them apart, we let nature take its course for their death. My position is incomprehensible if one just sees abortion as a medical procedure on a clump of cells, and not the murderous destruction of a human.

Happy? I'm going to guess not. Now you'll provide a rebuttal (along with several other people), and you'll expect a prompt response, calling me a coward if I refuse.

[The Huskar Social Union]

So your response to "why should the woman and fetus be made to suffer unnecessarily" is: "this is a waste of time". What a shameless cop out.

---

It's from a different thread, but it shows a pattern of behavior that needed to be brought forward to show your attitude to such things.

In brief, I'm not utilitarian. The ends do not justify the means. Abortion is a murderous action, which is worse then temporary suffering. It is certainly a difficult choice, but it is better to have the fetus die from natural causes than to kill him/her. When someone is ill, we don't rip them apart, we let nature take its course for their death. My position is incomprehensible if one just sees abortion as a medical procedure on a clump of cells, and not the murderous distraction of a human.

Happy? I'm going to guess not. Now you'll provide a rebuttal (along with several other people), and you'll expect a prompt response, calling me a coward if I refuse.

Its better to have it die from natural causes? So its okay to put this woman through 4 more weeks of unnecessary pain and stress even though the fucking foetus is going to die anyway and that it cannot be saved. That is not fucking better, it is completely unnecessary

That is fucking stupid.

[The Huskar Social Union]

I hope the department of health intervenes in this case and overrules the board. Its a shambles that this woman is being denied her constitutional right to an abortion despite the requirements for termination being met and is now being told to by her doctor to go to england instead.

[The New California Republic]

In brief, I'm not utilitarian. The ends do not justify the means. Abortion is a murderous action, which is worse then temporary suffering. It is certainly a difficult choice, but it is better to have the fetus die from natural causes than to kill him/her.

And the woman is expected to suffer, even though the fetus has no chance at life? What is the point of that?

---

When someone is ill, we don't rip them apart, we let nature take its course for their death.

Complete fucking nonsense. Medicine intervenes repeatedly when someone is ill, so you can't try to play that card.

---

My position is incomprehensible if one just sees abortion as a medical procedure on a clump of cells, and not the murderous distraction of a human.

Your position is perfectly comprehensible from the perspective of expecting the woman to suffer while a dying fetus is left inside of her for a month.

[Hakons]

In brief, I'm not utilitarian. The ends do not justify the means. Abortion is a murderous action, which is worse then temporary suffering. It is certainly a difficult choice, but it is better to have the fetus die from natural causes than to kill him/her. When someone is ill, we don't rip them apart, we let nature take its course for their death. My position is incomprehensible if one just sees abortion as a medical procedure on a clump of cells, and not the murderous distraction of a human.

Happy? I'm going to guess not. Now you'll provide a rebuttal (along with several other people), and you'll expect a prompt response, calling me a coward if I refuse.

Its better to have it die from natural causes? So its okay to put this woman through 4 more weeks of unnecessary pain and stress even though the fucking foetus is going to die anyway and that it cannot be saved. That is not fucking better, it is completely unnecessary

That is fucking stupid.

In brief, I'm not utilitarian. The ends do not justify the means. Abortion is a murderous action, which is worse then temporary suffering. It is certainly a difficult choice, but it is better to have the fetus die from natural causes than to kill him/her.

And the woman is expected to suffer, even though the fetus has no chance at life? What is the point of that?

---

When someone is ill, we don't rip them apart, we let nature take its course for their death.

Complete fucking nonsense. Medicine intervenes repeatedly when someone is ill, so you can't try to play that card.

---

My position is incomprehensible if one just sees abortion as a medical procedure on a clump of cells, and not the murderous distraction of a human.

Your position is perfectly comprehensible from the perspective of expecting the woman to suffer while a dying fetus is left inside of her for a month.

You guys are expressing my point. The argument goes on without end. My mind instantly reaches for the well-worn reply, but the heart wants to argue no more.

[The New California Republic]

You guys are expressing my point. The argument goes on without end. My mind instantly reaches for the well-worn reply, but the heart wants to argue no more.

Read: "It is too difficult to argue with you". Cop out. Again.

[Ifreann]

"So let's just kill the fetus" isn't monstrous? When people are ill, we don't murder them to get it over with. Murder doesn't become legal if a person is terminally ill.

Isn’t it legal to euthanize someone if they give consent?

I'm almost positive it is not.

[The New California Republic]

Isn’t it legal to euthanize someone if they give consent?

I'm almost positive it is not.

To a certain extent in some places, because of the existence of Dignitas etc.

[Ifreann]

I'm almost positive it is not.

To a certain extent in some places, because of the existence of Dignitas etc.

I would be shocked if euthanasia was legal in Ireland and I had somehow missed that happening until now, and missed all mention of it during the Repeal The 8th campaign.

[Ors Might]

In this particular post, you treat disgust with ending the lives of humans as a difference of taste rather than as a valued moral principle.

These aren't human lives. They are consciousnessless biological existences.

From the scientific standpoint, an early-term abortion is basically on a similar level to tumor removal or weeding a garden out.

Yeah no. They may not be human beings but they are human lives. The term “consciousnessless biological existences” also applies to those in comas but they are still human lives.

[Genivaria]

Its better to have it die from natural causes? So its okay to put this woman through 4 more weeks of unnecessary pain and stress even though the fucking foetus is going to die anyway and that it cannot be saved. That is not fucking better, it is completely unnecessary

That is fucking stupid.

And the woman is expected to suffer, even though the fetus has no chance at life? What is the point of that?

---

Complete fucking nonsense. Medicine intervenes repeatedly when someone is ill, so you can't try to play that card.

---

Your position is perfectly comprehensible from the perspective of expecting the woman to suffer while a dying fetus is left inside of her for a month.

You guys are expressing my point. The argument goes on without end. My mind instantly reaches for the well-worn reply, but the heart wants to argue no more.

Your inability to provide a sound argument is noone's fault but your own.

[The Rich Port]

You guys are expressing my point. The argument goes on without end. My mind instantly reaches for the well-worn reply, but the heart wants to argue no more.

Read: "It is too difficult to argue with you". Cop out. Again.

Also known as the Wings of Redemption Argument.

"I don't wanna do this anymore oh shit we got donations hold up"

[The Caleshan Valkyrie]

That is seriously fucked up. I knew that it may take some time for the decision to allow abortions to be fully accepted and implemented, but not when the situation is as clear cut as this is. So the woman has to have her suffering prolonged by a month while waiting for the possibility that the fetus will be miscarried? Completely monstrous.

"So let's just kill the fetus" isn't monstrous? When people are ill, we don't murder them to get it over with. Murder doesn't become legal if a person is terminally ill.

Next-of-kin can have life support discontinued. Can’t get much more next-of-kin than mom.

[The New California Republic]

To a certain extent in some places, because of the existence of Dignitas etc.

I would be shocked if euthanasia was legal in Ireland and I had somehow missed that happening until now, and missed all mention of it during the Repeal The 8th campaign.

I wasn't meaning Ireland specifically. That is an entirely different mountain that needs to be assailed.

[Bardarus]

I don't support this decision because to abort a baby in a mother's womb is to deny a human being life, society today has become more selfish in general and cares more about its own wants and needs than the fact that its denying life before it even managed to reach this world.

[The New California Republic]

I don't support this decision because to abort a baby in a mother's womb is to deny a human being life, society today has become more selfish in general and cares more about its own wants and needs than the fact that its denying life before it even managed to reach this world.

Yeah, how selfish of women to not want to be enslaved to the fetus for 9 months if they don't want it to be there but have no legal recourse. How selfish(!)

[Bardarus]

I don't support this decision because to abort a baby in a mother's womb is to deny a human being life, society today has become more selfish in general and cares more about its own wants and needs than the fact that its denying life before it even managed to reach this world.

Yeah, how selfish of women to not want to be enslaved to the fetus for 9 months if they don't want it to be there but have no legal recourse. How selfish(!)

Im not saying that THE WOMAN in question is selfish for wanting to have an abortion because she might have not enough resources to raise her child Im saying that society today has become too abortion oriented and i only support abortion ONLY if the pregnant woman's life is in danger.